Cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of Bio-C Repair, Endosequence BC Root Repair, MTA Angelus and MTA Repair HP

Abstract

The aim was to evaluate in vitro cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of Bio-C Repair (BCR), compared to Endosequence BC Root Repair (ERRM), MTA Angelus (MTA-Ang), and MTA Repair HP (MTA-HP). MC3T3 osteoblastic cells were exposed to extracts of the repairing bioceramic cements. After 1, 3, and 7 days, cytotoxicity and genotoxicity were evaluated by MTT and Micronucleus tests, respectively. Cells not exposed to biomaterials were used as a negative control. Data were compared using ANOVA two-way, followed by the Tukey Test (α=5%). MTA-Ang and MTA-HP showed no difference in relation to control regarding cytotoxicity in any experimental times. BCR and ERRM reduced cell viability after 3 and 7 days (p<0.05); however, the reduction caused by BCR was less than that caused by ERRM. Considering the micronucleus formation, all biomaterials caused an increase after 3 and 7 days (p<0.05), being greater for the BCR and ERRM groups. It can be concluded that BCR is non-cytotoxic in osteoblastic cells, as well as MTA-Ang e MTA Repair HP. BCR and ERRM showed greater genotoxicity than others tested biomaterials.

Cell Biological and Antibacterial Evaluation of a New Approach to Zirconia Implant Surfaces Modified with MTA

“…These results are in line with SEM micrographs, which reveal that a smaller number of osteoblasts adhered to the Zr MTA samples after 24 h of culture compared with other groups. These results are, however, contrary to those found in other studies [ 12 , 20 , 30 ]. Besides the use of different cell lines and the use of a fresh or set material, previously published studies have evaluated the cellular response in direct contact with pure MTA cements, instead of MTA-based coatings applied on a textured zirconia disc, as in the specific context of this study.…”

“…Due to its excellent chemical, physical and biological properties, in particular its biocompatibility and osteoconductive potential, it has been used in dentistry for over 20 years [ 10 , 11 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 ]. MTA is used in endodontic treatments [ 13 , 19 , 20 ] and is also recommended in vital pulp therapy to preserve the vitality of dental pulp [ 13 , 19 , 20 ]. Several studies have demonstrated the antibacterial and antifungal properties of this material [ 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 ].…”

“…MTA is used in endodontic treatments [ 13 , 19 , 20 ] and is also recommended in vital pulp therapy to preserve the vitality of dental pulp [ 13 , 19 , 20 ]. Several studies have demonstrated the antibacterial and antifungal properties of this material [ 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 ]. Despite the potential of MTA as an antibacterial agent, there are no studies on its use in implantology [ 23 ].…”

Effect of pH on the solubility and volumetric change of ready-to-use Bio-C Repair bioceramic material

“…BCR has similar cytocompatibility and a higher radiopacity than Biodentine (Septodont, Saint Maur des Fosses, France). 2,3 Bio-C Repair is not cytotoxic to osteoblastic cells, 4 and promoted the deposition of mineralized nodules and cell migration 5 demonstrating its biocompatibility and bioactive potential. 6 BCR showed low volumetric change after immersion in distilled water, with values lower than 3%, after evaluation by micro computed tomography (micro-CT).…”